You’ll all have seen it by now, the meme above, featuring a North American Black bear sitting at a camping table, reminiscing about his experiences of eating human flesh, and coming to the conclusion that humans are essentially the same. The take away message is obvious: Hey bro, we're all the same, whatever our sexual inclinations, race, or religion. So, like, chill out, and stop having an actual group identity.

Of course, the only people this meme ever cons out of having a positive identity are straight, White people, and, even in those cases, it just pushes them in the direction of assuming the negative identity of the ethnomasochistic, as it is psychologically impossible to not have an identity.

Using David Cameron’s latest porkly embarrassment as a convenient starting point, Andy and Colin return to their mics to meditate on a wide range of political subjects, from Europe’s migrant crisis, Donald Trump, and tensions within US elites to the well-nigh impossible attempt to put lipstick on a pig and make an electable silk purse out of the sow’s ear of Hillary Clinton.

The idea of Ectogenesis (artificial womb technology) has been with us since the 1920s. Its implications have been discussed in Brave New World and even The Matrix. The purpose of this article isn’t to predict the viability of this technology but to highlight the feminist response. The evolution of this technology began to gain momentum about twenty years ago and the feminist response has been quite amusing. Some feminists like Shulamith Firestone believed that anything which would free women from reproduction ought to be welcomed. Soraya Chemaly writes:

"In her seminal work, The Dialectic of Sex, written in 1970, Shulamith Firestone argued that inequality between genders, and women’s virtual imprisonment in the home, was the direct result of biological reproductive differences and women’s correlating investments in mothering. For her, ectogenesis, accompanied by revolutionary social changes, was the way to free women from the tyranny of their own biology put in the employ of patriarchal structures, including the traditional family. She noted that, so far, these technical and social changes have been impeded by medicine’s domination by men, who have no vested interest in upsetting the traditional status quo." (Emphasis mine)

It is remarkable that feminists who wage war against their own female biology should have the temerity to brand others “misogynists,” but that is the subject for another post. Nevertheless, we must give Firestone credit for remaining faithful to the tenets of her ideology, demented as it may very well be. Other feminists have responded with great alarm that this technology (when fully developed) would result in the obsolescence of women.

Throughout the recent Brouhaha over Ahmed the Inventor (sic), a casual perusal of the reportage and its concomitant outrage via the Commentariat illustrates one indisputable fact regarding the American population – despite having an expansive and largely successful public school system, few comprehend the manner in which it functions.

This simple but true fact is astounding to outsiders in the sense that “public schools” in America are actually overseen by the public. (Note to casual American citizens: That means you.) To be sure, there are myriad Federal and State regulations which must be adhered to and an often perplexing array of outside standards which must be met. However, that does not detract from the reality that in every community of any size in the United States, a School Board meets, for which ordinary Americans can sit for election.

An eerie, frightening expectancy pervades the air as if something terrible is going to happen. Obtuse and naïve people think 'migration' is finite, but it's an ongoing process with our replacement as the aim. This will not be painless yet governments encourage us to think so. We have a frightening future.
On 22 August 1998, the newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat quoted Omar Bakri: "I work here in accordance with the covenant of peace which I made with the British government when I got [political] asylum." This covenant allowed Muslim extremists to plan attacks abroad and develop terror networks here. In 1999 it was reported that each year around 2,000 Muslims were trained in Holy War at camps in Britain run by Bakri's organisation al-Muhajiroun.

In Birmingham and London trainees were taught hand-to-hand combat and survival skills. For military training they went to Yemen and Afghanistan. After the London bombings, The Times reported that "a dozen members" of Al-Muhajiroun "have taken part in suicide bombings or have become close to Al-Qaeda and its support network". In January 2007 Bakri revealed that Islamist extremists were infiltrating the police and other public sector organisations. The Daily Mail exposed eight members of al-Qaeda in the Metropolitan Police. How do our elites miss this? Or is it actually something they want?

On the Marble Cliffs is a complex work, existing on many levels. To be precise I don’t hold it above the rest of Jünger’s books. But of course it’s among the top five, if I should express it like that. First of all the title is very apt, combining as it does beauty with danger. Jünger himself had that ambition with the title and I must say he succeeded. As for novel titles in general On the Marble Cliffs is especially rich in connotations, the marble part symbolizing tradition and beauty, the cliff part symbolizing danger and then some.

It looks like the world’s oldest profession continues to be attacked from the newest crop of do-gooder liberals. One example comes from an editorial in Al Jazeera where the author, one Simon Hedlin, asserts that the “Swedish model” is the best means of tackling sex trafficking/prostitution. Basically, the Swedish model decriminalizes the selling of sex – which lets the hookers off the hook – while penalizing buyers. I’m not really interested in delving into the whole debate over the morality of prostitution itself, as the late George Carlin said it far better than I ever could:

The West could well be said to be experiencing its own collective "dark night of the soul" right now. The reasons for this are many, varied, and multifaceted, but at its core, the problem is a spiritual one. We have lost our moorings, and as such, have veered toward ruination. A faithless culture has no particular reason to struggle, grow, or thrive; it lacks any especial cause to value its own continuance.

This is not to say that all aspects of the West's current malaise are attributable to its current state of secularism, nor to claim that only believers can make positive contributions to the construction of a healthy and robust culture. The role of faith, however, can scarcely be ignored, as it offers a sort of transcendentally-grounded bulwark against despair, which in turn tends to arrest the advance of nihilism, thus holding decline at bay. With faith's erosion, however, this bulwark is broken, and all kinds of undesirable elements are free to surge in.

Facing the Problem (and Forcing the Issue) of Multicultural Meltdown

London is the only city in the world that can credibly argue that it is both the greatest city in the world and that it is the greatest city in all of history. Excepting Paris, there is not another city in the world that has been so central to its nation’s identity for so long. (I don’t know, maybe some Scandinavian capital has always been just as dominant in its national conscious, but I’m talking about major powers.) Of England’s truly world famous monuments, most are found in, or very near, the City of London. London is England’s New York, Washington, and Hollywood, all in one. Much more could be said about London’s immense significance to England and the world, but none of it changes the fact that, sooner or later, England needs to let it go.

These days, people are talking quite a bit about African-Americans and crime, violence and race warfare. While the connection is hard to ignore, we should make it clear that we are not scapegoating those who are the symptom and not the origin of the problem. That leads to further revelations which might put the entire situation in context.

As I have written before, minorities face an ugly dilemma: assimilate and lose culture or retain culture and be marginalized. No amount of welfare state programs can recover the pride and sense of well-being that is lost as a group realizes that it is not in control of its own fate, and exists merely as a tool of something larger. Even if the majority is mixed-race, that “new race” is hostile to the minority group, and by the nature of young people falling into attraction with those around them, will quickly destroy the original race and replace it with the new monoculture of non-race. This alone would induce a fury in one sufficient to explain any number of riots and crimes.

There is a very odd scene in the celebrated Rogers and Hammerstein musical Oklahoma, in which the play's hero, the jolly, upbeat Curly, attempts to talk his antagonist, the surly, sullen Jud, into committing suicide.

Jud is a creep, to be sure: a menacing stalker, who is later revealed to be a murderer. Still, the song's humor – and it is funny – brings great discomfort when the viewer considers the inherent cruelty of the circumstance. It is even a little heartbreaking how Jud comes around so readily to Curly's point of view on how his death would really be the happiest outcome for everyone, including himself:

Back in December 2014, Alternative Right published The Failure of Putin, an article that criticized the polices of Putin's Russia from a strategic point of view. The main criticism was that Putin, by concentrating on slivers of the Ukrainian border and neglecting the opportunities offered by America's essentially fragile Middle Eastern position was playing a poor game of judo, effectively pushing the twin pillars of a naturally divergent post-Cold-War West together, and thus ensuring Russia's continued inferiority. As I wrote at the time:

"As a judo aficionado, Putin should realize that if you push directly at a larger opponent, you are more likely to help him keep his balance than throw him off it. In effect, this is what Putin has been doing with the West."

"Integration is the time between the first black family moving in and the last white family moving out" – Saul Alinsky

As is the Microcosm, so is the Macrocosm

The feminist ‘social justice’ campaign first launched on Twitter against “manspreading” has made the male practice of sitting a little too comfortably in a public space into a criminal offense. The arrests that have resulted from this criminalization of public posture represent a fundamental attack upon our personal freedoms and on our own ability to govern ourselves in social situations without resorting to overarching laws and policing. John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle has taken a modern, politically correct turn for the worse.

This also represents an attack on males, but even more so on White males, who have literally had their living spaces invaded and have been forced to squeeze aside for the ‘leg room’ of hordes of non-Whites.

The liberal establishment in the West seems intent on national suicide. Just as they deem George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four to be a blueprint on how to run a country rather than a brutal warning about life under the socialist jackboot, so they deem Jean Raspail's novel The Camp of the Saints to be a blueprint on importing third world people in their millions and bringing Western civilisation to a close.

The majority of people in the West suffer from the illusion of permanency – by which I mean they think tomorrow will be no different to today and that next year will be no different to this year. They are correct that little will change in such a short time span, but the West has put into motion a series of events that will totally transform our society well before 2050, let alone by the end of this century.
A child born today, in a peaceful and cohesive part of the West, will be a mere thirty-five years of age by 2050 but he or she will live through the biggest racial / cultural upheaval ever witnessed in the history of mankind. By the time they reach middle age the West will have seen racial / religious civil war and terrible bloodshed. Who will emerge the winner is an unknown, but the odds are firmly stacked against the Europeans – unless there is a fundamental sea change in our altruistic attitudes.

With the incessant barrage of adulation unleashed by the media on the occasion of Queen Elizabeth’s Diamond Jubilee, the bigger picture has slipped down the back of Britain’s national sofa yet again.

While we have heard lots of twaddle about what a subtle manager of the national psyche she is and how similar to us she actually is (minus her diamonds, caviar, and gilded carriages), nobody seems to have much of a grasp on what monarchy in the 21st century actually is, or of the rationale behind it. The gap where that unasked and unanswered question lies seems for the most part to be clogged with trashy platitudes like “if we didn’t have a Queen we’d have to have a president” and “I suppose it’s good for the tourists.” Very profound!

Having ascended to the height of the world for some brief thousands of years (with a long, muddling interlude in the middle), the West finds itself on the back foot against its more numerous competitors. None of this is especially concealed: the only confusing part about it is that a large portion of the people who might otherwise be charged with perpetuating the civilization have arrayed themselves against it, often barely understanding, themselves, what it is that they are tearing down.

With the chaos caused by the European migrant crisisINVASION OF EUROPE, there is one narrative that is not getting much attention at the moment even though it lies at the heart of what is happening: this is the question of female leaders and what that can mean for a country.

Nowadays, when the US marines are lowering standards so that women can "serve" in the front line (and thus speeding the day when wars are entirely fought by drones), we are all supposed to be gender blind and not notice whether this or that position is occupied by a woman, unless of course they are blaming their failures on "sexism" or invisible sex-selective carapaces that limit their otherwise inevitable upper movement. But, no matter how hard leftists try, gender is not about to go away, and at the highest political level it is worth considering how it impacts on events.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king, and, right now, with the migrant hordes battering at the unhinged doors of Europe – while being fed and watered for their trouble – it is quite easy to stand head and shoulders above the low level of Europe’s leaders. Especially the childless Angela Merkel, whose brain seems to have been strangled in her skull by a late, misplaced, post-menopausal mothering instinct, which has imprinted on the feral, squealing hordes of Third World welfare shoppers, pushing towards Germany.

In the crumbling of Europe’s puny defences, there have been some bright spots, such as the Czech refusal to take non-Christians, along with similar noises from the Poles and other Slavs. Viktor Obran in Hungary has also put up some token resistance, but obviously not enough. The Hungarian police have never looked more pathetic than they have in the face of the migrants, egged on by the bleeding-heart international media. The invaders have ignored them and gone round them, only stopping to pick up free bottles of mineral water and snacks to sustain them in their campaign of continued disobedience. But, then again, it is not Hungary and the Slavic states that the migrants are interested in. It is affluent North European countries, like Germany, Holland, the UK, and those in Scandinavia.

"Skoptsy is a plural of 'skopets,' an archaic word meaning 'castrated one' in the Russian language. As their title indicates, the main feature of the sect was castration. They believed that after the expulsion from the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve had the halves of the forbidden fruit grafted onto their bodies forming testicles and breasts. Thus, the removal of these sexual organs restored the Skoptsy to the pristine state before the Original Sin. In this the Skoptsy maintained that they were fulfilling Christ’s counsel of perfection in Matthew 19:12 and 18:8-9.

There were two kinds of castration: the 'lesser' and 'greater seal' (i.e. partial and complete castration). For men, 'lesser' castration was the removal of the testicles only, while 'greater' castration was the removal of the penis as well."

(The following article was originally composed in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Connecticut in December 2012, and was published on the "old" Alt-Right site on January 2, 2013. With a fevered push for "gun control" once again afoot among the usual suspects following last week's spectacularly horrific on-air massacre of a Roanoke reporter and cameraman, the 'piece'—pun intended—has duly been summoned out of retirement.)

In his article “Police State Progressives,” Jack Donovan echoes so many of my own thoughts on the post-Newtown American Zeitgeist that I am tempted to quip that he stole my gunfire on the subject. Liberals, he finds, don’t really care for the notion of power being granted to “the people”—they have learned to stop worrying and love the state. Of course, were the face of Big Brother still revealed in the smirking frat-boy features of George W. Bush instead of the shining, godlike countenance of mulatto rainbow wonderboy Barack Obama, chances are the libs would have a far harder time carrying on their love affair. (Even though the policies of the two men aren’t markedly different, image is indeed everything when it comes to today’s facile state-smitten progressives.)

When one thinks of the French language, it is impossible not to think of the richness of its literature. Known for its theater and poetry, its classicism and romanticism, French has produced some of the world’s best authors. But like many things in France, its culture is declining. Where did this decline start? Did it start with the Cultural Marxist revolution of the 60’s? French author Léon Arnoux who recently published L’épuration et les Poètes (The Purge and the Poets) claims the origins of the decline coincide with the purges at the end of the Second World War.